Posts Tagged ‘Climate change’

The People’s Climate March: Hope makes a comeback

Saturday, September 27th, 2014 - posted by Maggie Cozens
Approximately 100 Appalachian State University  students traveled to New York for the People's Climate March.

Approximately 100 Appalachian State University students traveled to New York for the People’s Climate March. Photo by Maggie Cozens.

“I know we’re exhausted; my feet hurt…actually my everything hurts,” said Dave Harman of 350 Boone, as our busload of students headed back toward North Carolina. “But I just wanted to say that this went beyond my wildest expectations. I’m still glowing from today.”

As we slowly wended our way out of Manhattan, tired and feet aching, I found myself struggling to process the overwhelming feeling that pervaded every inch of the nearly 4-mile long procession earlier that day. The feeling saturated every piece of artwork and humble homemade sign, resonated in each drumroll and singing voice, and illuminated the eyes of every one of the 400,000 marchers in attendance. Such was the overpowering feeling of hope at the People’s Climate March.

See more photos from the march.

Approximately 100 Appalachian State University students took part in Sunday’s march and happily found Appalachia well-represented upon arrival. We could not walk two feet without running into someone carrying a sign calling for an end to mountaintop removal coal mining.

One of the Appalachian State totems was garnished with a People’s Climate March sign that read “I’m marching for the end of mountaintop removal.” It was one among countless others, and no demographic, environmental or social issue went unrepresented. Mothers, fathers, grandparents, children, indigenous groups, politicians and celebrities joined together and walked in solidarity. The student section was alight with passionate youth from across the country, eager to roll up their sleeves and build a better future, as bright yellow and orange signs ebulliently bobbed up and down along the sea of marchers like rising suns.

The diversity of the marchers was a beautiful sight to behold, but perhaps more stunning was the common thread running between them. Everyone was united in their confidence to affect change; the understanding that tackling the factors behind climate change — the environmental degradation caused by poorly regulated industries, inadequate government involvement, overconsumption and our growth-obsessed economy — holds the solution to a myriad of interconnected global issues today. It quickly became apparent at the march that climate change is as much a political, social, and cultural issue as it is an environmental one. And that efforts to address the problem could lead to a transformation as expansive as climate change itself.

Later that evening on the bus, Dave mentioned in all his years of activism he had never seen anything like the People’s Climate March. The shift in morale was so strong it was almost palpable. In New York and in every sister march around the world, the air was electrified with hope and faith in the future. This was perhaps no more evident than at 1 p.m., when a moment of silence erupted into an explosion of noise. Every marcher raised their voice in opposition to climate change; shouting for each other, the future, and the planet. Dave remarked that the clamor was hair-raising, a sonic “atomic bomb” filled with promise and power.

After attending Sunday’s march, it is hard to shake that feeling of hope. It is disturbing how lacking it had been beforehand, but its return is beyond welcome and reassuring. In the face of such a daunting and massive problem as climate change, it is easy to throw up your hands in exasperation and become discouraged. But after this weekend we should realize this problem is not insurmountable and, if the numbers are any indication, that no one is fighting it alone.

Click here to submit your comment supporting the EPA’s efforts to act on climate.

We Made History! Highlights from the People’s Climate March

Thursday, September 25th, 2014 - posted by kate

15339824261_284508c1c6_h
View more photos of the Appalachian contingent at the People’s Climate March.

Last weekend, Appalachian Voices joined 400,000 people in New York City for the largest climate march in history. And it was truly inspiring.

Kate Rooth, Matt Wasson and Thom Kay were among the AV staff joining the Appalachian contingent at the People's Climate March

Kate Rooth, Matt Wasson and Thom Kay were among the AV staff joining the Appalachian contingent at the People’s Climate March

While massive extractive fossil fuel interests try everything in their power to tighten their grip on our region’s energy future, it’s moments like these that show we are making progress. People from across the country came to the march, including many dear friends from Central Appalachia who are directly impacted by the destruction of mountaintop removal coal mining and our country’s reliance on coal.

We laughed, we cried, we danced and chanted, but most importantly we sent a signal loud and clear to world leaders gathering for UN climate negotiations that action must be taken immediately to avert further impacts of climate change.

The march was more than four miles long and included an enormous variety of people and issues. One contingent of activists supported the clean, renewable power sources that will help address the climate crisis. In the midst of the robust Virginia contingent, dozens of wooden model wind turbines twirled in the breeze. In the middle of the march was a youth contingent which included K-12 students and their families and stretched more than four blocks. The visuals were stunning, the energy was electrifying, and for once, the weather was perfect for a climate march!

The People's Climate March, stretched for nearly four miles and included and estimated 400,000 people. Photo from Avaaz.org

The People’s Climate March, stretched for nearly four miles and included and estimated 400,000 people. Photo from Avaaz.org

Leading the march were communities in the frontlines of the climate crisis. From Black Mesa, to the Gulf, inner city Chicago to the hollers of Appalachia, impacted communities have been standing together as part of the Climate Justice Alliance. It was an honor to stand with Appalachian leaders and support the courageous efforts the frontline communities that were marching.

The People’s Climate March demonstrated that communities are standing together and the immense power of those committed to fighting. Perhaps most importantly, it reminded each of us that we are in this together.

As we continue to fight state-by-state and town-by-town in our region for solutions and strong measures to reduce pollution, this march filled us with inspiration and resolve.

Were you at the march? We’d love to see your stories and memories in the comments.

Prevailing Politics Influence State Reactions to EPA Carbon Rule

Sunday, August 10th, 2014 - posted by Amber Ellis

By Brian Sewell

Flexibility: it’s the foundation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants.

“That’s what makes it ambitious, but achievable,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said when she unveiled the plan on June 2. “The glue that holds this plan together, and the key to making it work, is that each state’s goal is tailored to its own circumstances, and states have the flexibility to reach their goal in whatever way works best for them.”

But the politics surrounding federal climate action also vary widely among states. Two months after the plan’s release, some states are optimistic, touting how much carbon they have cut in recent years as a good start. Others are positioning themselves for a fight.

Changing Political Climates

With Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe in office, Virginia could be the most amenable state in the region to the EPA’s efforts. Gov. McAuliffe announced his support for regulating carbon emissions late in his campaign and recently reinstated a 35-member state commission on climate change made up of elected officials, industry representatives, environmental advocates and scientists.

In North Carolina, Republican Gov. Pat McCrory’s on-the-record comments about climate change are scant. He has claimed at various times that “there has always been climate change,” or that it is “out of our control.” But if actions speak louder than words, the McCrory administration’s approach is telling.

This year, the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources removed documents about climate change from its website, including the state’s Climate Action Plan, which took dozens of experts years to research and compose.

Gov. McCrory also recently joined eight other Republican governors in penning a letter to President Obama that claims the EPA’s carbon rules would “largely dictate” the type of electric-generating facilities states could build and operate, and criticizes the president for seeking to “essentially ban coal from the U.S. energy mix.” Rather than suggesting improvements, the governors demand that the regulations be thrown out altogether.

Other Republican governors including Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam were absent from that letter. While the Tennessee legislature is far from active on climate change, major cities in the state such as Nashville and Chattanooga have released their own climate action plans. And the Tennessee Valley Authority, the federally owned utility that powers Tennessee and portions of six other states, expects its emissions to be half of what they were at their peak in 1995 by 2020, according to a statement released the day the EPA’s plan was announced.

In West Virginia and Kentucky, the second and third largest coal-producing states in the country, regulations that could negatively affect the coal industry elicitw particularly intense backlash. The two states recently joined a lawsuit against the EPA brought by coal CEO Bob Murray, who says the agency is lying to the American people about the existence of climate change.

The states claim that what the EPA is attempting “is nothing short of extraordinary” and that the agency wants to impose “double regulations” on coal plants since harmful pollutants other than greenhouse gases are already regulated under another section of the Clean Air Act. But the courts have repeatedly ruled that the EPA has the authority and obligation to regulate carbon pollution.

Earlier this year, Virginia passed legislation to require a cost-benefit analysis of regulating carbon dioxide. And West Virginia and Kentucky made laws directing state agencies to develop alternative standards and compliance schedules.

Regardless of how outspoken they are, state leaders opposing the EPA may be out of step with voters. According to a June poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News, 67 percent of Americans either strongly or somewhat support the EPA’s plan and 29 percent oppose it.

The EPA is expected to finalize the rule by June 2015 and states must submit their implementation plans by June 2016.

The Case of the Shrinking Salamanders

Sunday, August 10th, 2014 - posted by Jack Rooney

By Amber Ellis

This year marked the hottest May and June in global record-keeping history, and it seems like salamanders across Appalachia are withering in the heat.

A June study in Global Change Biology found that climate change may be having a negative effect on six Appalachian salamander species. According to the study, spells of hotter, drier weather puts extra strain on the cold-blooded amphibians, requiring more energy for them to live and grow.

Appalachia boasts the greatest salamander diversity in the world, and their prevalence and abundance makes them an integral part of regional ecosystems. Their shrinking population means less food for birds and small mammals, and has the potential to disrupt the entire food chain.

Climate change may be impacting the human food chain as well, according to sustainability nonprofit Ceres. The organization released a study this June asserting that climate change puts U.S. corn production and, by extension, the entire national food system at risk.

An activist is born

Monday, August 4th, 2014 - posted by Marissa Wheeler
Appalachian Voices interns Marissa Wheeler and Jeff Fend, and Virginia Campaign Coordinator Hannah Weigard outside EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Appalachian Voices interns Marissa Wheeler and Jeff Feng, and Virginia Campaign Coordinator Hannah Weigard outside EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Last Tuesday, on the first day of the carbon rule hearings at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., I stepped off the Metro full of anticipation for my first-ever public rally for any cause, let alone an environmental one.

I arrived at the Federal Triangle station slightly overwhelmed by the unfamiliar surroundings but, following the sounds of live music to the front of the building, I knew upon first glance that I had found my destination.

On the wide semi-circular lawn, children ran with toy replicas of wind turbines. People of many ethnicities and a range of ages stood chatting and putting the finishing touches on colorful posters. A woman and a young musician led a call-and-response demanding “Clean Energy Now.” And on the street, volunteers handed out Ben & Jerry’s ice cream.

I accepted a Moms Clean Air Force sticker from a helpful volunteer and hunted for more free items to show my support. Meanwhile, inside EPA headquarters, Hannah Wiegard and Jeff Feng from Appalachian Voices presented their testimony on the dangers of mountaintop removal coal mining and the need to take swift action to combat climate change.

Proudly sporting my “I Love Mountains” button, I was ready to hobnob with other Americans advocating for clean energy and climate action including lawyers, career environmental advocates, interns like me, and citizens who traveled great distances to appear before the EPA and raise their voices in support of cutting carbon pollution.

These are the people I surround myself with at home and at school, but I’ve often felt like somewhat of an imposter in their presence. I can’t talk knowledgeably about “carbon capture and sequestration” like they can. I waste far too much water, paper, gas, food and electricity. And this was my first-ever environmental rally. In these kinds of situations, my insecurities tend to build inside me like guilt and create a sense of otherness in my mind between myself and the people I admire and want to emulate.

But that morning, I felt immediately welcomed into the fold because just being there meant that I was contributing to the cause. Building grassroots support and demonstrating the power of people mark the beginnings of social and legislative change, as rally speakers such as Green Latino President Mark Magaña and the Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the Hip Hop Caucus impressed upon the crowd.

For me, catching the spirit and optimism of the rally has given greater clarity to both a collective vision of a clean energy future and what I can do as an individual to help us get there. It’s one thing to wear the pins and stickers; it’s another thing to feel empowered by your peers to take action and work toward a common goal. This sense of belonging is the most valuable thing I’ll take with me from the rally. The free sunglasses are pretty cool, too.

Is Obama’s Climate Action Plan on Track?

Friday, July 25th, 2014 - posted by Jeff Feng

“While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged.” – President Obama, June 2013

President Obama lays out his administration's Climate Action Plan at Georgetown University in June 2013. Photo: Whitehouse.gov

President Obama lays out his administration’s Climate Action Plan at Georgetown University in June 2013. Photo: Whitehouse.gov

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan is pretty clear in establishing that if we don’t act now, our kids will be living on a different planet.

But since the release of his administration’s plan in June 2013, has Obama made strides in developing a clean energy economy and protecting the environment by fighting climate change?

Let’s take a look at his five-pronged approach to acting on climate: deploying clean energy; building a 21st-century transportation sector; cutting energy waste in homes, businesses, and factories; reducing other greenhouse gas emissions; and leading at the federal level.

First up is deploying clean energy. A major part of accomplishing this goal is first looking at power plants, the largest source of carbon pollution in the country. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency first announced proposed carbon standards for new power plants in September 2013. Future power plants will have to adhere to these national carbon pollution limits. And just last month, the EPA made history by announcing the first-ever limits on carbon pollution for existing power plants.

Under the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, states are given flexibility to meet individual emissions targets with an overall goal of cutting carbon pollution nationally by 30 percent below 2005 levels. Electricity generated by renewable sources such as wind and solar doubled during Obama’s first term, but the Clean Power Plan needs to continue the momentum. With that in mind, Obama hopes to redouble electricity generated through wind and solar by 2020. Utility-scale renewable energy is becoming more of a reality even with the reasonable, perhaps conservative guidelines of the Clean Energy Plan.

Seeing as it is 2014, Obama also wants to build a 21st-century transportation sector. The EPA and DOT are working to update heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standards by March 2016. Implementing standards for heavy duty vehicles would build on the benefits of the fuel economy standards set in 2011, cutting emissions by 270 million metric tons and saving 530 million barrels of oil. Commercial trucks, vans, and buses are the second biggest polluters in the transportation sector, presumably behind passenger vehicles. Speaking of passenger vehicles, fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles now require an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.

It seems like carbon dioxide has stolen the show, but what about other greenhouse gas emissions? What’s being done to stop hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) from doubling by 2020 and tripling by 2030? Who’s working to make sure methane levels that don’t increase to the equivalent of 620 million tons of carbon pollution by 2030 (despite the fact that, since 1990, U.S. methane emissions have dropped by 11 percent)?

HFCs were used to phase out ozone destructive chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and are found in refrigerators and air conditioners. While HFCs do not deplete the ozone layer, they have a high global-warming potential and are sometimes referred to as “super greenhouse gases.” Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is working to ban the most detrimental HFCs and develop suitable replacements.

The federal government’s plan to reduce methane emissions also takes a multifaceted approach. Just last month, the EPA announced its plans to strengthen air pollution standards for new municipal solid waste facilities, the third largest source of methane emissions, by requiring them to capture 13 percent more landfill gas than previously dictated. Under the EPA’s plan, landfills would need to capture two-thirds of methane and air toxin emissions by 2023. To cut methane emissions from agricultural operations, the second largest source of the potent greenhouse gase, the USDA, EPA, and DOE released their “Biogas Roadmap” of voluntary suggestions to implement methane digesters. Apparently using a bottom-up approach in going from lower to higher emitters, the EPA has yet to build on voluntary programs in the oil and gas industry, which is the largest source of methane emissions. Methane regulations may be considered later this year, but would not be finalized until the end of 2016.

On to cutting energy waste in homes, businesses and factories. Ideally, we’d all want energy that’s both reliable and affordable. Groups like Appalachian Voices have demonstrated that energy efficiency is both the cleanest and most cost-effective method to reduce pollution, grow our economy by creating thousands of jobs, and save money for families and businesses.

The Climate Action Plan and the Better Buildings Initiative imagine that commercial and industrial buildings will be 20 percent more efficient by 2020. In Obama’s first term, DOE and HUD helped more than two million homes become energy efficient. The DOE is also finalizing conservation standards for appliances and equipment that would help customers save more. Finally, the USDA recently announced it would allocate approximately $250 million to developing energy efficiency and renewable energy for commercial and residential customers in rural areas.

By virtue of all the stakeholders mentioned above, President Obama believes the federal government must lead the charge towards a cleaner future. Last year, he signed a Presidential Memorandum dictating renewable sources make up 20 percent of the federal government’s electricity by 2020. By working with the U.S. military and other federal agencies, he hopes to lead by example and prepare the U.S. for the impacts of climate change. The U.S. Geological Survey plans to spend $13.1 million to develop three-dimensional mapping data to respond to weather disasters. And the Bureau of Indian Affairs is allocating $10 million to teach tribes ways to adapt to climate change.

Even with these initiatives, the road to energy efficiency and clean energy won’t be easy. Considering that Obama’s Climate Action Plan was announced just last year, historic work is starting to move the United States to a sustainable and stable environment. It’s a start, but we certainly have miles to go.

’80s Flashback: Dr. Hansen’s carbon dioxide warning

Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 - posted by molly
Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration's 2013 International Energy Outlook

Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s 2013 International Energy Outlook

Twenty-six years ago today, Dr. James Hansen of NASA told a Congressional committee that the space agency was 99 percent certain that the global warming trend had a clear culprit: gases, such as carbon dioxide, from man-made sources.

As The New York Times reported at the time:

“Global warming has reached a level such that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and observed warming,” Dr. Hansen said at the hearing today, adding, “It is already happening now.”

Between 1988 and today, the Billboard hits may have changed from Guns N’ Roses to Katy Perry, but Dr. Hansen’s warning is still playing on repeat.

Scientists at the 1988 hearing called for a sharp reduction in the burning of fossil fuels that release carbon dioxide, and recommended “a vigorous program of reforestation” to absorb excess carbon from the atmosphere. Instead, global carbon emissions have risen from about 20,000 tons to more than 30,000 tons (see the change here) while deforestation has dramatically accelerated.

In a classic case of better-late-than-never, however, America is finally beginning to address its carbon dioxide emissions. As we describe in the current issue of The Appalachian Voice, the Supreme Court gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate climate-altering gases back in 2007. This month the EPA proposed the first limits on the amount of carbon dioxide that existing power plants can emit. Since these power plants are responsible for 40 percent of nationwide carbon dioxide emissions, the EPA’s proposals would go a long way toward curbing climate change and advancing clean energy.

So, 26 years from now will we look back on Dr. Hansen’s warning and regret that we failed to act? Or will we be grateful that in 2014 we finally took action to lessen the impacts of climate change and promote a sustainable energy future? The choice is ours, though we’re probably stuck with the chart-topping hits of the ‘80s regardless.

> Tell the EPA you support strong carbon pollution limits for existing power plants
> Learn more about carbon pollution and climate change
> Read about how the proposed rules could affect your state

What does EPA’s carbon rule mean for your state?

Friday, June 13th, 2014 - posted by Ryan Murphy
The EPA's interactive "Where You Live" tool summarizes climate change impacts and state actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

The EPA’s interactive “Where You Live” tool summarizes climate change impacts and state actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s recently announced Clean Power Plan aims to cut carbon pollution from power plants nationwide. Specifically, the plan seeks to cut carbon emissions by 30 percent from 2005 levels. A new tool on the EPA’s website allows users to see how their state will be affected by the federal effort.

The tool is a clickable map that shows a particular state’s carbon emissions in millions of metric tons and the percentage of those emissions which came from fossil fuel-fired power plants. This is calculated into an emission rate that is expressed as “pounds per megawatt hours.” The EPA’s tool presents its yearly emissions calculations as such:

1. Millions of metric tons of carbon emitted by the state
2. Amount of energy produced by the state (presented in terawatt hours, each of which is equal to one million megawatt hours)
3. A combination of the two previous factors (pounds per megawatt hours): This demonstrates how many pounds of carbon are emitted for every megawatt hour of energy produced by a power plant, or how much carbon dioxide is released to meet that state’s energy demand.

The table below shows 2012 emissions levels of five central and southern Appalachian states and the amount of carbon pollution those states will need to cut under EPA’s proposed plan.

A table of carbon emissions and coal's share of electricity generation in five central and southern Appalachian states. Click to enlarge.

A table of carbon emissions and coal’s share of electricity generation in five central and southern Appalachian states. Click to enlarge.

What accounts for the differences in emissions? For example, Virginia released 861 fewer pounds of CO2 per megawatt hour than Kentucky in 2012.

That’s where another feature of this tool comes in: each state’s profile features a pie graph of different energy sources and their share of a state’s overall generation.

Kentucky derived an enormous 92 percent of its energy from coal in 2012. Virginia derived only 20 percent of its energy from coal. The majority of the Old Dominion’s energy comes from nuclear (40 percent) and, a close second, natural gas (35 percent).

Burning coal releases more carbon than any other energy source, so it makes sense that those states which use the highest percentages of coal also release the highest amount of carbon.

This carbon dioxide accumulates in the atmosphere and aggravates climate change. A significant reduction in these emissions seeks not only to mitigate climate change but also to reduce pollutants that can cause asthma and other health problems.

Each state must develop a plan to meet these lower carbon emission goals. In an ideal world, these states would make a seamless transition to cleaner forms of energy. They could remain energy-based economies by becoming clean energy-based economies.

It remains to be seen how the coal industry’s influence will affect the implementation of this rule by Appalachian states. But considering the fact that as much as 95 percent of a single state’s energy can come from coal, the EPA’s plan could have a significant effect on Appalachia as states are given federal impetus to curtail carbon emissions, and, implicitly, coal consumption.

Virginians applaud new federal carbon pollution protections

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2014 - posted by cat

Business, health, farming, and national security leaders praise Environmental Protection Agency for protecting state

virginia-voicesRepresentatives of Virginia business, national security, health and agricultural sectors joined environmental advocates this week in praising the newly announced carbon pollution limits for existing power plants as necessary public health and security safeguards, and a beneficial economic driver.

The new EPA guidelines give states the flexibility to implement strategies that can increase energy efficiency and improve resiliency while reducing this harmful air pollutant. The local leaders called on Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe to lead a robust and inclusive process for developing a bold state plan to implement the new standards in Virginia.

David Belote, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel, Virginia Beach:
“Anyone looking for a job in Virginia today wants to be in a growth industry. Reducing carbon pollution and growing our clean energy sector unlocks the doors to the new opportunities that Virginia’s businesses and workers have been looking for. Promoting clean energy and climate security isn’t a ‘war’ on anybody – it’s unleashing innovators and entrepreneurs to profit while improving the planet and the lives of its people.”

Dr. Anthony Smith, CEO of Secure Futures, Staunton:
“The proposed new carbon pollution standards represent a big step toward moving Virginia’s economy to cleaner fuel sources. “Retiring old and inefficient coal-fired power plants with solar and wind power will give more Virginians access to 21st century energy jobs, and the ability to enjoy healthier air and water.”

Dr. Christine Llewellyn, physician and radiologist, Williamsburg:
“We know that climate change is already occurring, but we also know that we still have time to prevent the most severe impacts if we act now to reduce carbon emissions. Policies such as the EPA’s proposed carbon pollution standards are an essential first step towards protecting the future for our children and grandchildren. These policies will not only reduce dangerous carbon pollution, but will also have other major health benefits.”

Tenley Weaver, owner and operator of Good Food – Good People, Floyd:
“When weather extremes get more uncertain, your regional food security is even more at risk. Climate disruption heaps costs on the shoulders of our farmers and threatens to put some of them out of business. The EPA’s initiative to limit carbon pollution is an essential step toward addressing the global warming crisis and its impacts, especially on organically grown local food crops.”

Acting on Climate: EPA unveils carbon rule for existing power plants

Monday, June 2nd, 2014 - posted by brian
The EPA's plan to regulate carbon pollution from existing power plants sends a strong signal that America is ready to act on climate. Photo licensed under Creative Commons.

The EPA’s plan to regulate carbon pollution from existing power plants sends a strong signal that America is ready to act on climate. Photo licensed under Creative Commons

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy announced a plan today to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 30 percent by 2030 compared with 2005 levels.

The highly anticipated plan is “part of the ongoing story of energy progress in America,” McCarthy said in a rousing speech that covered the host of risks, and opportunities, that come with a changing climate. Not neglecting the significant role coal and natural gas will continue to play in America’s power sector, McCarthy said the plan “paves a more certain path forward for conventional fuels in a carbon constrained world.”

The rule provides states flexibility to meet required reductions — a framework the McCarthy says makes the plan “ambitious but also achievable.” It will likely lead to an increased reliance on less carbon-intensive fuels than coal, including natural gas and nuclear energy, which McCarthy mentioned several times during the announcement. But it should also be a precursor to unprecedented investments in clean energy, deployment of renewable energy sources and the adoption of programs to significantly improve energy efficiency nationwide.

Every American city, town and community stands to benefit from cutting carbon pollution, and Appalachia and the Southeast have abundant opportunities to move beyond both a historical over-reliance on coal, and the destructive methods used to extract it.

Act now to support a strong carbon rule that incentivizes renewable energy development and clean energy jobs for Appalachia.

“Appalachia has traditionally borne the brunt of the damage from the nation’s coal-dependent economy and is suffering the health impacts and environmental and economic devastation of mountaintop removal coal mining and related industrial practices,” said Appalachian Voices Executive Director Tom Cormons.

“Energy efficiency is the quickest, cheapest and most equitable way to meet our energy needs while reducing carbon, and it’s a tremendous unexploited opportunity in the Southeast,” Cormons said. “Strong efficiency programs will also boost economic prosperity, creating thousands of jobs. This is especially important in many parts of Appalachia where good jobs are scarce, and lower household incomes preclude too many from the benefits an energy-efficient home.”

Charting the decline in carbon emissions from energy consumption. Graphic by  New York Times using Energy Information Administration data.

Charting the decline in carbon emissions from energy consumption. Graphic by New York Times using Energy Information Administration data

Opposition to the plan will be fierce. You’ve probably noticed that some of coal’s staunchest supporters, the National Mining Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example, are already attempting to take the EPA to task for what they say will harm the economy and make little more than a dent in carbon emissions on a global scale.

The EPA is sure to be challenged in court. Luckily, the rule’s legality, in a broad sense, is almost as unambiguous as the science that compelled the Obama administration to take action in the first place.

Tell the EPA you support a strong rule to boost clean energy and cut carbon pollution.

In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the authority to treat greenhouse gases as dangerous pollutants, enabling it to use the Clean Air Act to place limits on them. Then, in 2011, the high court issued a ruling in American Electric Power v. Connecticut that essentially requires the EPA to regulate carbon pollution from power plants.

Even Congress, albeit a past session, deserves a bit of credit. It was the enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments that gave the federal government the authority, and the responsibility, to regulate pollutants that it has determined endanger public health and welfare. So

Overall, carbon emissions in the U.S. have declined since peaking in 2007 due to many factors including an economic slump, greater energy efficiency and a growing share of electricity generation coming from natural gas, falling about 12 percent between 2005 and 2012, before climbing 2 percent last year.

But we’re still dumping billions of tons of the greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. And until a rule for existing plants is implemented, the nation’s fleet of more than 600 coal-fired facilities will face no cap on carbon pollution. Today’s announcement sends a strong signal that America is ready to act on climate.

Stay tuned for more of our coverage of the rule. In the meantime, read “Confronting Carbon Pollution” in The Appalachian Voice and visit Appalachian Voices’ carbon & climate pages.